Musicians in Taichung.

Complex issue with no easy answer.

I have a close friend who enjoys playing devil's advocate over coffee on Saturday afternoons. He is taking me to task for what I wrote earlier about the government's decision to eject the Chinese journalists who work for Xinhua and The People's Daily.

To begin with, he told me about the press release from Reporters sans frontieres, which condemned the government's position and suggested that the reporters be allowed in. Here is graf from the organization's statement:

Urging Taiwan to reconsider its decision, the worldwide press freedom organisation said, "Even though the People's Republic of China is certainly no model of press freedom, using censorship against its media makes no sense. We believe that the right to news and information should in no circumstances be compromised because of political differences."

While I understand the point, I still believe that these reporters are reporters in name only. Perhaps this situation could have been handled more smoothly by government officials who, rather than do what many democratic government' officials do, i.e. bullshit, chose to criticize the reporting and tell the world how angry they are about Chinese journalists misrepresenting Taiwan in communist newspapers. What they should have done is either never allowed the journalists into the country to begin with or at the very least spin the issue as a visa problem and not a press problem, though it would have been clear to everyone what was going on.

I am not, however, suggesting that all Chinese journalists or even those who work for party organs, are fake reporters. Anyone who has been keeping up with the ebb and flow of the Chinese press must be aware of the number of significant contributions China's journalists have offered their readers. China seems to have a number of investigative reporters, all of whom probably know the risks they are taking, who continue to uncover corruption, sometimes at the very highest levels of government.

At this juncture, I'd be interested in hearing other opinions on the issue, especially from journalists or those who agree with Reporters sans frontieres' position.

Excuses, excuses ...

I know the frequency of posts leaves something to be desired. I am busier now than I have been in a long time. I'm scrambling about trying to fill out financial aid forms for graduate school, plus I have a number of stories to work on and the magazine must be put to bed by Friday. So for the regulars, my apologies. Things should return to normal in May.

And as I understand things, DogoftheSouth is also often beholden to deadline pressures around the same time I am.

A blow to freedom of the press? I think not.

When the Mainland Affairs Council decided to eject two Chinese reporters-- one from Xinhua and the other from the Communist Party's mouthpiece, The People's Daily--earlier this week, we were blessed with the unsurprising hue and cry from the KMT and the biased media outlets that tacitly support the pan-blues.

We were told that ejecting the two reporters was a blow to Taiwan's burgeoning democracy, that freedom of the press was now on its knees begging for mercy and that by sending the reporters back the government would irreparably damage cross-strait relations. We were, so to speak, invited to a horsefeathers banquet.

Just because these reporters work for news agencies doesn't make them real journalists; they are nothing more than hacks for the Chinese Communist Party. They have no interest in balance, fairness, getting at the truth or even reporting the facts. They are paid to file stories that confirm what the boys in Zhongnanhai want to hear. The stories must fill out the narrative that Taiwan is the Rebel Province brimming with evil splittists trying to lead the good people of Taiwan astray on their inexorable journey to "reunification."

How anyone can pretend that these people are anything more than the cogs of a propaganda mill or outright spies baffles...

Hot spots, trouble zones ...

whatever you want to call them, news junkies are always keeping an eye out for the next revolution, coup d'etat or outright act of aggression. In Taiwan--considered one of the hot spots of the world because of China's intransigence--people are aware of the potential for things to get out of hand, so much so that the country's awkward relationship with China defines day-to-day politics.

But if Al Giordano is to be believed, the next international flare up is nigh. Vincente Fox may be about to wager his legacy as a shephard of democracy on a power grab sanctioned by Washington. Read the full piece here. (via James Wolcott)

An item that should concern bloggers or readers thereof ...

Via Steve Gilliard.

Talking shit

in the Legislative Yuan means you are dooooomed. or canned or harassed ... In any case, it's not good. More here.

The People's Daily gushes over the KMT's visit.

I guess they just can't help themselves. Here are two choice passages:

People on both sides of the Straits have the same roots and share weal and woe, a strip of the shallow straits cannot cut off the feeling of reminiscence. The "tour of reminiscence" embodies such a feeling of history and continuation of tradition, and exhibits the Chinese people's unique national sentiments, so naturally it is easy to strike a responsive chord in people's hearts.

and ...

During its tour, the KMT stressed that it would provide the Taiwan people with "another kind of expectation and choice," and would not "follow the authorities in running amuck," obviously, this remark was made strictly in light of the reality, which deserves deep thoughts to be made by various social circles on the Island.

I'm still stumped about where, if anywhere, the KMT thinks this will lead. The CCP and the KMT inked a 10-point proposal, but since the KMT doesn't represent the government of Taiwan, that piece of paper is merely symbolic. Perhaps one day it'll be considered symbolic of the Nationalists' perfidy. You can read the piece here.

Beijing tames the shrew?

Now that Beijing has tentatively agreed to see Lien Chan, the chairman of the KMT, to talk about cross-strait relations, one has to wonder what the KMT thinks they'll get out of this. At this juncture even the most naive of us have to ask why the KMT seems intent on rewarding Beijing's belligerence--after China passed the anti-secession law--with talk of thawing realtions. If anything, the KMT's behavior will reinforce the CCP's thinking when it comes to Taiwan; prove you're a tyrant and be rewarded with supplication.

The KMT will have to make a choice soon, whether its members would prefer to draw their power from the people in Taiwan, or instead try to curry favor from the ghoulish lot at Zhongnanhai.

Here's something on ducks and necrophilia.

Important research from Holland.

Here's something I desperately need ...

Clocky.

Food poisoning sucks ...

After having holed up in the bathroom for well over eight hours, and recovering in bed for another 24, I say stay away from ice cream.

On a brighter note, we'll see on Saturday if President Chen Shui-bian can get a million marchers to the streets to protest the anti-secession law. I for one am hoping that the numbers go through the roof. Of course such a protest won't change Beijing's mind, but it might remind China's martinets that their ham-fisted approach to Taiwan leaves something to be desired.

More to the point ...

Moral indignation is certainly edifying; you can snort and stomp like a rhinocerous. With all the hand wringing over the French push to sell arms to Beijing, US officials are lashing out at Gallic hypocrisy. At first glance, one can hardly blame them. Indeed French efforts to lift the arms embargo on China stink of avarice and blandishments that flow like the Loire.

Yet waving the fist may be premature. This Asia Times article describes a US$5 billion loan, approved by the US Export-Import Bank to China National Nulear Corp. If true, the US is bankrolling China’s growing nuclear ambitions as Janus-faced US officials berate Beijing for its cavalier approach to proliferation. The Times’ sources say that Chinese officials have assured the US that proliferation is a thing of the past. If Washington takes such statements at face value while castigating France for its naivite in dealing with China, then something other than principle is afoot. At this juncture, the US’ argument with France is one of style, not substance.

The late Edward Said once wrote: “One of the shabbiest of intellectual gambits is to pontificate about abuses in someone else’s society and to excuse exactly the same practices in one’s own.”

Let's cut to the chase; everyone wants in on the game. Australia has floated the idea of exporting enriched uranium to China. The US has pulled off a back-door deal at the behest of American nuclear firms. Russia’s planned joint military exercises with China is more about Moscow’s desire to show off the hardware to a prospective buyer than it is to strengthen ties. Ukraine has admitted to selling ballistic missiles to China. France’s true sin, it would seem, is that he asked first if he could kiss the girl.

What happened?

Well, I suppose I should at least say a word or two about why I haven't been posting much this week. I've caught another severe cold, and it has taken all the energy I could muster just to make it in to work. (It was deadline week at the magazine.)

I'm also about to pull a variation of the much-hated Josh Marshall here by telling you that I have written a post that I think should be seen, but I have to give it further consideration, because by posting it, I could adversely affect a friendship, so I may not. How's that for a lame tease?

Big News.

The beginning of the week was a smashing success if you think of bad news as a house party. The Central Intelligence Bureau (CIB) announced that they apprehended, ahem, a dead man, Chen Yi-hsiung, who, according to the CIB tried to kill President Chen Shui-bian last March. It's not always good news when you get your guy, especially if he is as stiff as a board and can neither defend nor incriminate himself. This end is just grist for the mill for the die-hard conspiracy lot. And die-hard they are; their raison d'etre is to find the "truth," which means getting the public to swallow their scurrilous lies.

Then China leaked some of the language contained in the "anti-secession" bill, a bill that reinforces China's threats to invade Taiwan, while reminding the world that Beijing would prefer the international community to treat China's belligerence toward Taiwan as an internal matter. The story got good play in the press, and CNN trotted out its China-Taiwan expert who parroted a number of Beijing's characterizations of Taiwan. Sigh.

Changes.

It looks like Rank is about to have a new blogger aboard. Dog of the South has expressed an interest in writing on Taiwan, which should give the blog more focus than it has had up until now. I'll let him fill you in on what he's about.

In addition, I've altered the masthead, intend to fix the uppercase lettering of the blog's title and have changed the weekly archives to monthly now that the blog is beginning its sixth month. I'm also looking into getting an RSS feed set up.

"My own mind is my own church."

The US wasn't founded on Christian values. More here.

Moo now means more than we thought ...


Just read the article.

Hammering the point home.

I just got back from the videoconference held here in Taipei at the Presidential Office where President Chen Shui-bian spoke with members of the European Union's Parliament in Brussels. What was eminently clear (a redundancy I know, but hell, I'm tired) was the fact that Chen had one point he wanted to get across; the European Union member states, by lifting the arms sanctions on China, was abandoning its universal values such as democracy and human rights, to serve national interests. Without being explicit, he implied that the EU member states were being hypocritical. And he made the point over and over again. No EU MP could have left that meeting without having an idea of what Chen wanted to say.

I was wondering how long this would take.

China is upset again. Asia's powerhouse sure does have a thin skin. They don't want Bill Clinton to meet with President Chen Shui-bian because they don't like "political" leaders from other countries being seen as lending legitamacyto Taiwan. Then again, one can understand their frustration and confusion. For even when someone such as Jiang Zemin steps down from the presidency, he still can hold onto a few state posts and exert his power within the party. Not so in a democracy. Bill Clinton is coming to Taiwan as a private citizen and collecting a hefty speaking fee as well. More here.